Page Last Updated: 8th August 2025
TRZ2 site activation commenced at 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood VIC on 18 April 2025 under Section 6(3) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic), with continuous transport-specific use and site improvements since that date. This use is now legally protected as an existing use and continues regardless of future zoning amendments, overlays, or adjacent public land classifications. A photo was taken on the day work started. Click here to view the photo and the full metadata.
Full TRZ2 activation of the site including exact dates, times, description of works, evidence photos and links for easy access to verify the EXIF data from each photo is available here
Some planning authorities may attempt to question the timeline of use commencement at 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood, based on the assumption that trailer hire operations began only in late June 2025. This interpretation is legally and factually incorrect.
Site activation commenced on 18 April 2025, with the installation of infrastructure, retractable stainless steel security bollards (traffic management control devices) (click here for placement measurements), garden clearance, boundary chain configuration, signage development, and strategic preparations for trailer hire. These activities were public, visible, and documented — forming part of a deliberate and uninterrupted pattern of site use consistent with transport-related activity.
Under established principles in Victorian planning law, use is deemed to have commenced not only when a commercial transaction occurs, but when there is:
This standard is reflected in case law, planning advisory notes, and enforcement guidelines. Site preparation, when coupled with consistent and publicly declared use, constitutes legal commencement.
Furthermore, existing use rights under Section 6(3) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic) do not rely solely on EFTPOS activation or trailer registrations. They apply to the overall lawful use of the land for a transport-related purpose, which in this case began over 90 days prior to the current date and has continued without interruption.
Lastly, any attempt to disregard the April–June period as non-operative fails under the principle of de minimis non curat lex — the law does not concern itself with trifles. Attempting enforcement action over technicalities would be disproportionate, unreasonable, and potentially subject to review.
The zoning applied to 7 Cullen Court under Amendment VC205 (Transport Zone 2 – TRZ2) has been applied unlawfully to privately owned freehold land. If this argument is upheld, it carries serious implications not just for this parcel, but for the broader integrity of Victoria’s planning system.
This case may establish that public-purpose zones like TRZ2, PUZ, or RDZ cannot lawfully be applied to land the Crown does not own, control, or intend to acquire. If zoning authorities exceeded their legal power (ultra vires), then many prior planning scheme amendments dating back to 1978 may also be invalid or open to challenge.
This case may become a legal precedent that forces statutory clarity and accountability across Victoria’s entire planning system. If zoning overlays were applied without proper legal authority for decades, the public is entitled to know — and affected landowners are entitled to challenge them.
Spotswood Trailers confirms lawful trailer hire operations commenced at 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood VIC on 24/06/2025 under Section 6(3) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic) with continuous use since that date, ensuring protection if zoning changes occur.
Lawful use of the TRZ2-zoned portion of 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood commenced on 18 April 2025, with the initiation of physical site works and infrastructure installation. This marked the beginning of continuous use and development in line with transport-related purposes under Section 6(3) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic). Trailer purchase and business name registration followed on 24 June 2025, reinforcing the lawful and ongoing commercial use of the land for trailer hire operations. Photographic evidence confirms uninterrupted activation and compliance since the April commencement date.
Spotswood Trailers has been meticulously operated within the boundaries of lawful, low-impact land use. While some Councils may attempt to sidestep zoning limitations by invoking local amenity laws or redefining activities as “unauthorised commercial use,” such positions would be misplaced in this context.
The use of this land is transport-specific in nature — consistent with both its TRZ2 classification and its physical function. It involves trailer movement, short-term positioning, and driveway access — not retail foot traffic or disruptive business activities. The site is clean, quiet, landscaped, and respectful of its surrounding environment.
Section 6(3) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic) protects the lawful continuation of use, regardless of zoning overlay or commercial character — provided the core function remains consistent. That is the case here. Any hypothetical claim to the contrary is anticipated, rebutted in advance, and unsupported by either fact or law.
It is acknowledged that the Department of Transport controls adjacent Crown land and administered Amendment VC205, which applied the TRZ2 overlay to 7 Cullen Court. However, this zoning is legally contestable as ultra vires due to the 1978 Executive Council discontinuance and the subsequent private title transfer under Instrument H323270. The land ceased to be for transport authority purposes at that time and has been privately owned and rate-paying since.
Activation of lawful use under Section 6(3) of the Planning and Environment Act commenced on 18 April 2025, as documented via GPS-verified EXIF metadata. Continued use and site improvements since that date have been uninterrupted. Attempts to retroactively challenge that activation — or to restrict boundary maintenance access — are not only unfounded, but would undermine public safety, vegetation control, and landowner rights under the Fences Act 1968 (Vic), Section 30.
This land is privately owned by Faye Maree Towson, TRZ2-zoned, and lawfully used for small-scale trailer hire, supporting local needs while maintaining compliance. For additional evidence and site details, visit our accountability log and video evidence at: here.
The lawful activation of 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood was achieved without requiring a planning permit, due to the permissive nature of the TRZ2 (Transport Zone 2) zoning applied to the land.
Under the Victorian Planning Provisions (VPP), TRZ2 zoning supports transport-related uses by default — including vehicle storage, trailer hire, and low-impact logistics — especially where consistent with the zone's stated purpose.
Clause 36.02 – Transport Zone (Schedule 2) outlines that land uses which support transport access and mobility (such as trailer hire) are considered as-of-right or conditionally permitted depending on the use class, with no permit required for minor physical works such as:
In line with this framework, Spotswood Trailers lawfully activated the site without needing to submit a planning permit application, based on:
This compliant activation demonstrates how TRZ2 land can be responsibly used for low-impact, transport-aligned operations — without red tape, and in full accordance with planning policy.
Ironically, while the Department of Transport has left adjacent TRZ2 land mostly unmanaged, the private TRZ2 parcel at 7 Cullen Court has been lawfully and responsibly activated — without the need for permits — as a direct result of understanding and applying the planning scheme as intended.
The lawful activation of 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood occurred without the need for a planning permit, in accordance with the Victoria Planning Provisions – Clause 36.04, which governs the Transport Zone (TRZ2).
This zone applies to land intended for the Principal Road Network and supports transport-related purposes such as trailer hire, vehicle storage, and low-impact logistics operations — particularly where no buildings or major works are involved.
Under Clause 36.04-1 (Table of Uses):
“Any other use” is permitted without a planning permit only if:
• The use is for a transport purpose, and
• It is carried out by or on behalf of a relevant transport manager.
In the case of Spotswood Trailers:
These activities fall under minor transport-related works that support mobility and public transport integration under the TRZ2 and PPTN overlay.
Clause 36.04-3 requires written consent from the Head of Transport for Victoria only where a permit application is made. Since no permit was required and no application was made, this clause does not apply.
Even if a permit had been hypothetically required, the TRZ2 zoning applied to this land is legally invalid. This zoning was:
As such, the zoning classification is ultra vires — beyond lawful power — and carries no enforceable effect.
⚠️ If the zoning is invalid, any planning permit obligation flowing from that zoning is also invalid. A permit cannot be required under a planning control that should never have existed.
Even if a future planning scheme amendment seeks to rezone the land at 7 Cullen Court to a more restrictive classification, this does not affect our lawful operations. Under Section 6(3) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic), existing use rights remain protected regardless of any subsequent rezoning, overlay, or ministerial directive. Any targeted attempt to override those rights would be procedurally improper, open to judicial review, and would raise questions of administrative fairness and possible maladministration. Our lawful use commenced in April 2025, is documented, and continues uninterrupted — firmly securing our rights under Victorian planning law.
Spotswood Trailers activated the site:
Therefore, no permit was required, and no permit could lawfully be demanded. Any attempt to enforce against this use on the basis of TRZ2 zoning is both procedurally flawed and legally indefensible.
| Legal Basis | Outcome |
|---|---|
| Clause 36.04 TRZ2 | Permits transport-related use with no permit where no buildings or restricted works are involved |
| Clause 36.04-2 | No permit triggered – no buildings constructed |
| Clause 36.04-3 | Consent from Head of Transport only applies if a permit is required – not relevant here |
| Zoning is ultra vires | Invalidates TRZ2 classification – removes legal basis for any permit requirement |
| Result | Lawful use, no permit required, protected under Section 6(3) Planning & Environment Act |
This page was first published on 5th July 2025
To ensure transparency and protect our lawful operations under Section 6(3) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic), Spotswood Trailers has prepared a publicly available evidence archive for regulators, council, and the community.
This archive contains documentary proof of:
Download: SpotswoodTrailers_ExistingUseEvidence_July2025.zip (Evidence Archive)
This archive is provided in good faith to demonstrate our compliance, transparency, and commitment to operating responsibly while maintaining our existing use rights under Victorian planning law. If you are a council officer, Department of Transport representative, or regulator, we welcome your review and are open to reasonable dialogue regarding our operations.
| Aspect | Details | Legal & Strategic Positioning |
|---|---|---|
| Zoning | TRZ2 (Transport Zone 2) privately owned land at 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood | Permits transport-related uses; trailer hire and vehicle storage consistent with zoning; rare private ownership strengthens position. |
| Land Ownership | Family-owned since 1993 under Faye Maree Towson | Unencumbered freehold; clear legal ownership documented for transparency and trust. |
| Use | Trailer hire, vehicle storage, site activation | Aligns with TRZ2 objectives; practical land activation reducing anti-social use. |
| Infrastructure | Bollards, CCTV, signage, heavy-duty trailers | Supports orderly, secure, safe use of the site. |
| Pricing & Service | Affordable $50/day, 24-hour drop-off, flexible payment | Supports affordability, accessibility, and local efficiency. |
| Community Benefit | Affordable moves, support for small businesses | Builds local goodwill and practical value. |
| Environmental Impact | Clean, secure, promotes recycling and reuse | Environmental stewardship; reduces illegal dumping. |
| Planning Compliance | Consistent with zoning; minor encroachments possible | “De minimis non curat lex” applies; willingness to adjust if needed. |
| Transparency | Public disclosure of ownership and use | Reinforces lawful use and community trust. |
| Risk Management | GPS tracking, bonded hire, secure payment | Minimises theft risk; ensures operational security. |
| Council/DOT Interface | Open, cooperative approach | Positioned as compliant, low-impact, and community-benefiting. |
| Legal Rights | Existing use rights under Planning and Environment Act | Protects ongoing operations if zoning changes. |
| Public Interest Alignment | Safety, affordability, local economic contribution | Aligns with public interest and community development goals. |
The land at 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood is not only zoned TRZ2 (Transport Zone 2) but also falls squarely within a designated “Car Parking / Principal Public Transport Network (PPTN) Area”, as shown on VicPlan. This overlay applies to land identified as strategically important to Melbourne’s high-frequency public transport system and encourages compatible land use that supports transport access, mobility, and modal integration.
Trailer hire — involving vehicle storage, movement, and temporary parking — is fully consistent with the intent of both TRZ2 zoning and the PPTN overlay. The site’s location within this overlay reinforces the appropriateness of its current use as a small-scale, compliant trailer hire depot serving the local transport corridor. It also underscores the public interest benefit of activating neglected transport-zoned land into a functioning, safety-managed asset aligned with government transport planning principles.
The contradiction is stark: while the Department of Transport has neglected its adjoining TRZ2 land for years, my mother’s private TRZ2 parcel has been responsibly activated in direct support of the overlay’s objectives.
All trailer movements, parking, and access operations occur strictly within the private boundaries of 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood. No trailers are stored on the nature strip, road reserve, or any public land. Vehicle access and bollard-secured parking are entirely contained within the freehold title boundaries, as confirmed by GPS data, photographic records, and aerial mapping tools such as VicPlan and Landchecker. This ensures full compliance with local laws and eliminates any basis for encroachment or obstruction claims.
The Department of Transport applied a Transport Zone 2 (TRZ2) designation to this privately owned land without fulfilling the mandatory legal requirement under Clause 23 of the Ministerial Direction – The Form and Content of Planning Schemes, which states that TRZ2 can only be applied with the written consent of the Head, Transport Victoria.
A formal Freedom of Information (FOI) response from the Department confirms that no such consent was ever issued. This means the zoning applied to the land is legally invalid — or ultra vires — rendering it open to legal challenge and carrying no enforceable effect.
This zoning error strengthens our use case in multiple ways:
In summary, the TRZ2 zoning error gives rise to heightened legal standing, existing use protections, and a compelling basis for asserting our rights under Victoria’s planning and administrative law framework. The government cannot impose a zoning classification that it did not lawfully apply — and then weaponize that classification against a compliant private citizen acting in good faith.
On 12 July 2025, Spotswood Trailers discovered a legal document that proves the current TRZ2 zoning of our site is ultra vires (beyond lawful power).
The Victoria Government Gazette No. 61, dated 5 July 1978 contains a formal notice under Section 528(2) of the Local Government Act 1958, discontinuing the road known as Cullen Street (now 7 Cullen Court). This document explicitly confirms the land was no longer needed for transport purposes and was offered for sale by the City of Footscray. Our title, vested by Instrument H323270, confirms the legal transfer into private ownership on 29 November 1978.
This means that TRZ2 zoning, which is reserved for land owned or actively required by the Department of Transport, was wrongly applied. Our land is private freehold with no transport encumbrance and should be rezoned appropriately (GRZ, NRZ5 or MUZ). My full legal analysis is available upon request.
Figure 1: Victoria Government Gazette No. 61 – 5 July 1978. This official legal notice confirms the formal discontinuance of the Cullen Street road reserve under Section 528(2) of the Local Government Act 1958. The shaded portion in the diagram corresponds to what is now 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood (Certificate of Title Vol. 1722 Fol. 204, L.G.D File No. 2527, Instrument H323270, derived from Vol. 09329 Fol. 027, TP 644167G). The notice explicitly authorised the land’s sale by the City of Footscray, confirming its permanent removal from transport purposes. This proves that the current TRZ2 zoning is ultra vires — beyond legal power — and therefore invalid.
A notarized copy of the 1978 gazette legal document notarized by a barrister and solicitor of the Supreme Court of Victoria and of the High Court of Australia is available here:
https://spotswoodtrailers.com.au/7CullenCourtImages/?TRZ2-Legal-Disclosure/Notarized-TRZ2-Legal-Disclosure-Documents
A notarized copy of instrument H323270 notarized by a barrister and solicitor of the Supreme Court of Victoria and of the High Court of Australia is available here:
https://spotswoodtrailers.com.au/7CullenCourtImages/?TRZ2-Legal-Disclosure/Notarized-TRZ2-Legal-Disclosure-Documents
The Victoria Government Gazette No. 61, dated 5 July 1978, contains a formal notice under Section 528(2) of the Local Government Act 1958 confirming the discontinuance of the road known as Cullen Street — now 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood.
This order was not made by a local officer or mid-level council authority. It was enacted at the Executive Council Chamber, Melbourne with the formal assent of the following senior state leaders:
This high-level sign-off explicitly authorised the permanent removal of the road from transport-related use and permitted its sale by the Council of the City of Footscray. The shaded diagram in the Gazette unambiguously matches the current boundaries of 7 Cullen Court.
Therefore, any suggestion that this land retains a transport designation contradicts the legal intent and force of the 1978 Executive Order. The land was removed from the road register, released from any public use requirement, and sold into private hands with no encumbrance — a fact now documented through title Instrument H323270.
This evidence confirms that the current TRZ2 zoning is legally indefensible. The Department of Transport has no rightful claim to this land under current or historic planning law.
Victoria Government Gazette LOCAL GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT At the Executive Council Chamber, Melbourne, the twenty-seventh day of June, 1978 Present: His Excellency the Governor of Victoria Mr. Dixon Mr. Haddon Storey Mr. Maclellan ROAD DISCONTINUED—CITY OF FOOTSCRAY Whereas it is provided in section 528 (2) of the Local Government Act 1958, that where a road (whether or not a public highway but not being a road set out on land of the Crown or any part thereof not required for public use the Governor in Council on the request of the council of the municipality in which such a road is situated made not less than one month after publishing in a newspaper generally circulating in the district and posting to the registered proprietor (if any) of the land a notice ... that such road or part shall be discontinued accordingly; And whereas the Council of the City of Footscray has requested that the Governor in Council direct that part of Cullen Street, Footscray, be discontinued and has more than one month previously published a newspaper generally circulating in the district and posted to the registered proprietors of land abutting or immediately adjacent to the road notice of intention to make such a request; Now therefore, His Excellency the Governor of the State of Victoria, by and with the advice of the Executive Council thereof, hereby directs— (a) that the said part of a road which is shown by hatching on the plan hereunder, shall be discontinued notwithstanding— (b) that notwithstanding such discontinuance the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works shall continue to have and possess the same rights in relation to the use of the land shown by hatching on the plan hereunder as it had theretofore in relation to the said road; and that the Council of the City of Footscray shall not interfere with any drains or other works in relation to such discontinuance with respect to the purpose of drainage or sewerage and for the purpose of any other such use; and (c) that, subject to any such right the power aforesaid may be granted in the Council of the City of Footscray by agreement.
Below are the most powerful excerpts from the Victoria Government Gazette No. 61 – 5 July 1978, clearly demonstrating that the land now known as 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood was permanently discontinued from transport purposes and lawfully sold into private hands:
Present:
His Excellency the Governor of Victoria
Mr. Dixon
Mr. Haddon Storey
Mr. MaclellanROAD DISCONTINUED—CITY OF FOOTSCRAY
Whereas it is provided in section 528 (2) of the Local Government Act 1958, that where a road (whether or not a public highway but not being a road set out on land of the Crown or any part thereof not required for public use the Governor in Council on the request of the council of the municipality in which such a road is situated...
“shall be discontinued accordingly”
And whereas the “Council of the City of Footscray has requested” that the Governor in Council direct that part of Cullen Street, Footscray, be discontinued...
Now therefore, “His Excellency the Governor... with the advice of the Executive Council”, hereby directs—
- (a) that the said part of a road which is shown by hatching on the plan hereunder, shall be discontinued
- (b) ...
- (c) that, subject to any such right, “the power... may be granted in the Council of the City of Footscray by agreement.”
These phrases confirm that the land was officially declassified from road or transport use and lawfully transferred into private ownership. The 1978 Executive Council decision remains binding under Victorian planning law, rendering the current TRZ2 zoning ultra vires and invalid.
The 1978 Executive Council Order, published in Victoria Government Gazette No. 61 – 5 July 1978, makes it unequivocally clear that the land now known as 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood was considered to have zero ongoing strategic value for transport or public infrastructure purposes:
Conclusion: The Victorian Government, Executive Council, and legal authorities in 1978 determined this land to be permanently surplus to all public, road, and transport needs. Any current designation under TRZ2 zoning contradicts the formal and binding outcome of this high-level decision.
The land at 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood was formally discontinued as a public road via an Executive Council order published in the Victorian Government Gazette on 5th July 1978. That discontinuance explicitly cited Section 528(2) of the Local Government Act 1958 (Vic).
Therefore, the application of TRZ2 zoning under Amendment VC205 (and all previous amendments as well) — without fresh acquisition or Ministerial consent under Clause 23 — is in direct conflict with Section 528(2). As a matter of statutory construction, this zoning is likely to be found ultra vires (beyond lawful power) and void ab initio (from the beginning).
Conclusion: Any zoning overlay or planning instrument that attempts to reassert transport or public road status over this parcel — without proper legal process — is invalid under Victorian law.
The Sankey Diagram below compares the Victorian planning system’s assumed pathway when applying Transport Zone 2 (TRZ2) with the actual legal history of the land at 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood.
On the left-hand side, you’ll find the typical planning assumptions: that TRZ2 was applied lawfully, with public ownership and appropriate ministerial consent.
On the right-hand side, we show the verified legal reality: the land was formally discontinued as a road in 1978 by Executive Council order, sold into private hands, never reserved or reacquired, and had no written consent for TRZ2 zoning under Clause 23 of the Ministerial Direction.
Each connecting arrow illustrates a direct contradiction — a break between what planners assumed and what the law actually supports. This isn’t a small paperwork error. It’s a structural failure that invalidates the zoning itself.
The result? The TRZ2 zoning is ultra vires — beyond legal power — and any permit requirement based on it is unenforceable. This diagram forms the backbone of our argument for lawful use and zoning correction.
The following ten points demonstrate why Spotswood Trailers operates on firm legal, strategic, and ethical ground. These arguments reflect both historic legal authority—including an Executive Council order from 1978—and current operational compliance under the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Together, they make clear that the TRZ2 zoning applied to our land is not just improper but legally indefensible.
On 14 July 2025, I received an official FOI response from the Department of Transport and Planning confirming that no written consent was ever issued by the Head of Transport for Victoria (or any authorised officer) to apply TRZ2 zoning to the privately owned land at 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood.
This response supports my claim that the TRZ2 zoning is ultra vires and invalid.
In July 2025, I submitted a Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the Department of Transport asking them to provide legal proof that they had the authority to apply Transport Zone (TRZ2) zoning to my privately owned block at 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood.
Under Clause 23 of the Ministerial Direction on Planning Schemes, the law clearly states that before land can be zoned for public transport purposes (like TRZ2), the Head of Transport for Victoria must give written consent.
The Department’s official FOI response confirmed:
This is a major planning error. It means the TRZ2 zoning over my land was:
This shows that a private citizen without legal training has exposed a serious failure in government planning procedures — one that could affect not just this site, but others like it across Victoria.
The land at 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood was not seized, occupied, or acquired through loopholes — it was lawfully sold by the State of Victoria in 1978, following a formal discontinuance process initiated by the City of Footscray and approved by the Governor in Council.
The Executive Council — including the Attorney-General and Planning Ministers — explicitly removed this land from the road network, declared it surplus to transport needs, and authorised its sale into private hands. This was a government-backed declassification and disposal, not an error or oversight.
Few landowners in Victoria can point to a formal Gazette notice, signed by the Governor and Executive Council, explicitly authorising the removal of their land from public use and transition to private ownership.
And yet, despite this ironclad provenance, the land is now subject to a zoning classification (TRZ2) that implies it is government-controlled — even though the government relinquished ownership in 1978.
This is the definition of a systemic double standard:
This is no longer just a planning issue. It is a test of Victoria’s legal and planning integrity:
Spotswood Trailers is not asking for special treatment — only that the rule of law be upheld and that historic decisions made in good faith be respected, not weaponised.
Spotswood Trailers may receive interest from senior legal professionals with deep expertise in property law, Crown land leasing, and ultra vires planning disputes. An invitation to review our evidence archive and consider an advisory brief has been extended to a leading Victorian property law expert at the King's Counsel level.
If formalised, the brief would include independent analysis of:
If activated, this may lead to written legal opinion, VCAT representation, or escalation into judicial or ombudsman-led proceedings.
This demonstrates that the matter has entered a tier of legal seriousness that could trigger state-level review, reputational scrutiny, and precedent-setting litigation if mishandled.
While Spotswood Trailers continues to welcome constructive dialogue and resolution, we are fully prepared to exercise all legal options necessary to uphold our position.
In preparation for any planning, zoning, or access-related proceedings, we have conducted advanced strategic modeling using Monte Carlo simulation techniques and scenario forecasting. This simulation analyzes thousands of possible Department of Transport and Council responses under Victorian planning law and administrative procedure frameworks.
| Anticipated KC Argument | Rebuttal by Spotswood Trailers |
|---|---|
| "Use only commenced after trailer registration in late June 2025." | Use commenced on 18 April 2025 with visible infrastructure works, security installations, and operational preparation. Supported by case law and planning advisory notes on physical works and intention. A photo was taken on the day work started. Click here to view the photo and the full metadata. |
| "TRZ2 allows discretion by authorities on enforcement." | TRZ2 cannot lawfully apply here—no consent under Clause 23 was ever issued. Zoning is ultra vires and therefore unenforceable. |
| "TRZ2 still carries the intention of future transport use." | The 1978 Executive Council Order permanently removed this land from transport use. Zoning intention contradicts binding historic legal action. |
| "The land is not zoned appropriately for trailer hire." | TRZ2 is transport-zoned land, and trailer hire is transport-related. The use is wholly consistent with zoning intent—unlike the adjoining public land left dormant by the Department. |
| "Public safety or amenity concerns exist due to trailer operations." | Operations are secured by bollards, GPS, and payment systems. The site is safer, cleaner, and more functional than surrounding Crown land, with clear benefit to public interest. |
This matter is no longer simply a zoning technicality — it is a multi-party strategic interaction with clearly defined risks, options, and payoffs. Using principles of game theory, we can see that the dominant strategy for all parties is lawful resolution through cooperation, not conflict.
| Option | Outcome | Payoff |
|---|---|---|
| Continue lawful use with transparency | Builds case, activates use rights, earns trust | +10 |
| Escalate to VCAT or Court | Forces legal precedent, likely win | +8 |
| Abandon site | Loss of lawful asset, state wins by default | -10 |
Optimal Move: Remain active, cooperative, and legally transparent — maximum strategic leverage.
| Option | Outcome | Payoff |
|---|---|---|
| Quietly withdraw TRZ2 / resolve issue | Avoids court, saves face, no legal fallout | +7 |
| Enforcement or denial | High legal and reputational risk | -8 |
| Negotiate lease or MOU to boundary | Shared control, avoids escalation | +5 |
Optimal Move: Withdraw or quietly resolve — further escalation creates negative outcomes.
| Option | Outcome | Payoff |
|---|---|---|
| Support or remain neutral | Avoids conflict, fair governance perception | +6 |
| Side with DoT | Legal exposure if TRZ2 proven invalid | -4 |
| Ignore issue entirely | Neutral, missed opportunity for leadership | 0 |
Optimal Move: Stay neutral or supportive — lawful use benefits the community and avoids reputational risk.
| Option | Outcome | Payoff |
|---|---|---|
| Rule for Clarke | Upholds law, validates historical record | +9 |
| Offer compromise | Soft precedent, potential appeal | +3 |
| Rule for Department | Contradicts Gazette, risk of legal error | -7 |
Optimal Move: Rule in favour of landowner — the legally sound, lowest-risk outcome.
| Option | Outcome | Payoff |
|---|---|---|
| Support landowner | Backs transparency, fairness, logic | +9 |
| Support government | Seen as backing bureaucracy over common sense | -3 |
| Ignore the issue | No change | 0 |
Optimal Move: Support lawful private use and transparency — aligns with public interest and planning integrity.
Nash Equilibrium: The dominant strategy for all parties is to acknowledge the zoning error, support lawful private use, and avoid legal escalation. No actor benefits by deviating alone from this outcome. Escalation only results in negative-sum consequences — legal, political, and reputational.
Spotswood Trailers is not seeking conflict — only the upholding of lawful use, documented history, and the integrity of Victoria’s planning system.
The following decision tree maps all plausible paths stemming from the Department of Transport's current position. It demonstrates that all decisions ultimately favour Clarke Towson’s lawful use, with cooperation being the highest-yield strategy for all stakeholders.
Conclusion: Every decision node leads to a Clarke victory or a reputational loss for the Department of Transport. Game theory and decision analysis confirm the only rational move is quiet resolution and acknowledgement of lawful use.
This decision tree maps out every rational course of action available to Hobsons Bay City Council regarding Spotswood Trailers and the TRZ2-zoned land at 7 Cullen Court. The outcome analysis shows that cooperation and acknowledgment of the zoning error yields the greatest legal certainty, reputational preservation, and public benefit.
Conclusion: Council’s optimal strategy is to formally recognise the legality and strategic benefit of the landowner’s operations, support rezoning, and cooperate in access arrangements. This reinforces public trust and avoids needless confrontation.
This decision tree outlines the optimal strategic pathways available to Clarke Towson in his legal and planning campaign involving 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood. Each action is modeled for outcome viability, reputational impact, legal effect, and cost-efficiency.
| Option | Legal Outcome | Reputational Outcome | Impact on Government | Cost/Time Efficiency | Game Theory Viability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Continue Legal Assertion + Public Documentation | Strengthens existing use rights and ultra vires argument. Prepares for VCAT or judicial escalation. | Increases credibility and public support as a rational, strategic operator. | Applies pressure; exposes procedural failings in TRZ2 zoning. | High ROI: Legal work already largely done, minimal marginal cost. | Best Move – Nash equilibrium if government resists but loses reputation or court case. |
| Negotiate Directly for Rezoning or Lease | Possible resolution without formal hearing. Preserves long-term rights. | Positioned as reasonable and cooperative. | Government avoids escalation; both sides win. | Low cost and fast timeline if successful. | Stable Option – Dominant strategy if Council and DoT cooperate. |
| Escalate to VCAT, Ombudsman, or Supreme/High Court | Potential landmark ruling in favour of private property and zoning integrity. | Massive profile boost as a citizen advocate; media potential high. | Reveals systemic flaws and triggers policy reform. | Higher financial/time cost; litigation risk. | Calculated Risk – High reward if state fails to rebut documentation. |
| Withdraw and Cease Operations | Loss of existing use rights; no legal precedent set. | Loss of face; perceived capitulation. | DoT and Council may avoid scrutiny or reform. | Low short-term cost, high long-term cost. | Worst Option – Dominated strategy with poor utility payoff. |
Legal Outcome: Strengthens use rights and ultra vires argument. Prepares for escalation.
Reputational Outcome: Strategic and credible.
Impact on Government: Exposes TRZ2 procedural failings.
Cost/Time Efficiency: High ROI, minimal added cost.
Game Theory Viability: Best Move – Nash equilibrium outcome.
Legal Outcome: Quiet resolution, preserves rights.
Reputational Outcome: Seen as cooperative.
Impact on Government: Mutually beneficial de-escalation.
Cost/Time Efficiency: Low cost, fast if successful.
Game Theory Viability: Stable Option – Dominant if cooperation exists.
Legal Outcome: Possible landmark ruling on zoning and property rights.
Reputational Outcome: High-profile advocate, strong public support.
Impact on Government: Systemic exposure and possible reform.
Cost/Time Efficiency: Costly and time-consuming but high impact.
Game Theory Viability: Calculated Risk – Potentially high payoff.
Legal Outcome: Forfeit rights, no precedent.
Reputational Outcome: Perceived as defeat.
Impact on Government: Status quo preserved.
Cost/Time Efficiency: Short-term savings, long-term loss.
Game Theory Viability: Worst Option – Low utility.
🧠 Strategic Conclusion: Clarke Towson’s optimal strategy under decision theory and game theory models is to continue documenting, negotiate where possible, and escalate only if required. His current legal page and case documentation position him advantageously within this matrix.
This analysis is published in good faith to transparently demonstrate that Spotswood Trailers has undertaken proactive legal preparation, risk modeling, and ethical governance. We invite any reviewing agency to assess the strength of our legal standing, the compliance measures implemented, and the strategic integrity of our case.
We remain open to reasonable dialogue and committed to legal transparency at every stage.
Date: 2015
Location: Crown land parcel adjacent to 7 Cullen Court, Spotswood (zoned TRZ2)
This 2015 photograph shows Department of Transport-controlled Crown land at 641 Melbourne Road Spotswood directly adjoining 7 Cullen Court in active use for trailer and equipment storage. The image clearly depicts:
This image directly supports the following conclusions:
Council has asserted that because I am the landowner and not the “relevant transport manager,” my use of the land for trailer hire is non-compliant with Clause 36.04-1 (TRZ2). That interpretation fails on four independent grounds.
The “relevant transport manager” condition only operates if TRZ2 was lawfully applied. The 1978 Executive Council discontinuance removed the land from transport use and it was transferred into private ownership. FOI responses show no Department of Transport consent or lawful instrument authorising TRZ2 for 7 Cullen Court. An unlawfully applied zoning cannot confer lawful restrictions; until zoning validity is established, this condition is irrelevant.
Across Victoria, TRZ2 land is commonly operated by private contractors, lessees and commercial entities who are not the statutory transport manager (e.g., construction contractors’ depots and logistics yards under government lease). Functionally identical private transport uses are already permitted on TRZ2 land. A landowner providing a lawful transport service on their own land is within the same category.
Under Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic) s 6(3), existing lawful use rights are preserved regardless of zoning. The lawful use of this land for trailer hire commenced on 24 June 2025 and has been continuous since. These rights are not displaced by a later change in interpretation or enforcement policy.
The following foundational Latin legal principles underpin the arguments presented throughout this legal notice. Each maxim directly supports a key aspect of our case.
These maxims are not decorative. They represent binding legal principles that govern Victorian law, planning disputes, and judicial interpretation. Their application here is both deliberate and appropriate to the facts.
Spotswood Trailers has engaged exclusively at the top of the disagreement hierarchy — presenting verifiable, statute-based claims supported by metadata, zoning instruments, and public records. We respectfully request all agencies responding to this matter to meet us at that level..
At Spotswood Trailers, we don’t just rely on facts, legislation, and evidentiary rigour — we also understand that emotion shapes decision-making, especially in public administration.
That’s why our approach has been carefully crafted to evoke constructive emotions such as:
In contrast, reactive emotions like annoyance, fear, or surprise may arise within agencies unfamiliar with this level of lawful preparation. To those officers and departments, we offer this gentle reminder:
“Emotional reaction is natural — but it should never override reasoned, law-based decision-making. We invite all parties to join us in engaging at the top of both the legal and emotional hierarchy — with respect, trust, and fact-based cooperation.”
To illustrate how emotional responses shape disputes, we reference Plutchik’s Wheel of Emotions — a proven model in psychology and public conflict resolution:
This model guides us to anticipate, interpret, and influence agency responses effectively, while remaining emotionally stable and strategically focused.
We respectfully invite all decision-makers to move with us into the higher realms of trust, joy, anticipation, and admiration — and away from reactive patterns of fear or denial that serve neither side.
After rigorous legal review, evidentiary compilation, and strategic modeling, the optimal path forward for all stakeholders has become unambiguous.
Every alternative strategy—technical enforcement, procedural challenges, or zoning justification—carries reputational, legal, and policy risks. None can withstand public scrutiny against the volume of historical documents, FOI disclosures, and strategic transparency published by Spotswood Trailers.
The most viable course of action for all parties is simple:
✅ Acknowledge the zoning error.
✅ Recognize the lawful use of 7 Cullen Court for vehicle parking and community trailer hire.
✅ Avoid legal escalation that can only end in judicial or public relations defeat.
Spotswood Trailers is not seeking conflict, compensation, or publicity — only that the rule of law be upheld, the rights of private landowners respected, and a systemic error be corrected with integrity and cooperation.
“You don’t win a legal game by overpowering your opponent — you win it by removing all their moves.”
— Strategic Planning Doctrine, Applied Here.
To advance the public understanding of land use, zoning interpretation, and citizen-led planning innovation, I will be compiling a comprehensive case study documenting the full story of Spotswood Trailers and the lawful activation of 7 Cullen Court under Transport Zone 2 (TRZ2).
This case study will include:
Once complete, it will be distributed free of charge to urban planning departments, law faculties, public policy schools, and local government associations across Australia.
The aim is to educate future planners, lawyers, public administrators, and students on what one individual can achieve with precision, clarity, good faith, and an evidence-based approach — even in the face of systemic inertia and bureaucratic silence.
This is more than just a legal defence — it’s a model for what community-led, lawful, transparent land activation can look like when done properly.
A formal press kit is currently being developed for potential distribution to leading Australian media outlets. The kit will document:
The press kit is being structured for potential submission to the following national media organisations and leading Australian journalists and investigative reporters:
The release timing will be influenced by the conduct of relevant public authorities in the coming weeks.
In the interest of transparency, all communications with public officials may also be published as part of the final release to ensure community accountability.
For regulatory or council inquiries regarding our lawful use, contact:
Clarke Towson
Spotswood Trailers
📞 0432 359 166
✉️ clarke@spotswoodtrailers.com.au
🌐 spotswoodtrailers.com.au
